"Andrew Dunstan" <and...@dunslane.net> writes: > On Wed, November 16, 2011 6:45 pm, Greg Jaskiewicz wrote: >> What will happen if I specify: >> includedir './'
> I would vote for it only to handle plain files (possibly softlinked) in > the named directory. I think Greg's point is that that would lead to again reading postgresql.conf, and then again processing the includedir directive, lather rinse repeat till stack overflow. Now one view of this is that we already expect postgresql.conf to only be writable by responsible adults, so if a DBA breaks his database this way he has nobody but himself to blame. But still, if there's a simple way to define that risk away, it wouldn't be a bad thing. (Do we guard against recursive inclusion via plain old include? If not, maybe this isn't worth worrying about.) regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers